Re: Radium article

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

Let's use an analogy that involves cancer.  We know that exposure to UV in sunlight results in basal cell skin cancer, and sometimes squamous cell skin cancer, and that sun exposure may enhance melanoma incidence, and we "know" this with considerably more certainty than that exposure to less than 5 rem "causes" cancer. According to my dermatologist, there are 50,000 cases of basal cell skin cancer per year in the U. S.  Moreover, our Congressman was one of the 5% who die from squamous cell cancer. 



However, we do not know quantitatively how much sunlight exposure produces a basal or squamous cell cancer, so we advise discretion.   People are advised to limit sunlight exposure.  We do not put sunny beaches off-limits, we do not force children to cover themselves up, we do not mandate the use of sunscreen, we do not force schools to teach all classes indoors and do sports in indoor arenas, we do not even ban tanning salons.  Most important, we do not assume that EVERYONE exposed to sunlight, NO MATTER HOW SHORT THE EXPOSURE,

will get any of these cancers.



Another example, closer to "home," we do not have a "radon standard" for homes that results in condemning houses with more than a certain radon concentration (even though we have standards for electrical wiring, etc.)



What some of us are asking is, why can't we apply the same common-sense approach to the putative carcinogenesis of ionizing radiation?





Ruth



Ruth F. Weiner

ruthweiner@aol.com

505-856-5011

(o)505-284-8406



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/